Saturday, October 16, 2010

Dooley Returns Trash Hauling Company Donation

By PHIL SUTIN > > 314-863-2812
(6) Comments

The campaign of St. Louis County Executive Charlie Dooley last month didn't hang on to a hot potato -- a $2,000 donation from Republic Services Inc., the parent of the Allied trash hauling company.

Republic's check arrived on Sept. 20 in the midst of controversy about involving Allied. On Sept. 24, the donation was on its way back to Republic. The history of the donation was in a campaign finance report Dooley filed Friday with the Missouri Ethics Commission.

Republic's contribution came just before the county council delayed action on transferring collection service in two trash collection districts to Allied when Veolia ES Solid Waste Management LLC exited the St. Louis Market on Oct. 1. Trash district opponents said the county either should rebid contracts in the districts or allow residents to choose their own hauler.

In a hearing last June Appeals Court Judge Kenneth Romines said "You can't compel this man to enter into an agreement with somebody who's one of the county supervisor's contributors. Isn't that what this is about?" The judge was on a court panel hearing the appeal of David Skaer of south St. Louis County of his conviction of violating the county Waste Management Code by not having a trash hauler. The judge echoed the sentiments of some opponents of the districts.

Since Jan. 1, 2009, none of the companies that collect trash in the districts contributed to Dooley until Republic sent its check. The campaign returned the check because keeping the donation "is inappropriate to take in the same week Allied was involved in a matter before the county council," Katy Jamboretz, spokeswoman for the Dooley campaign said.

COMMENTS from readers:

Would Dooley have kept the check otherwise?  You bet he would.

squid said on: October 16, 2010, 7:55 am
I don't understand returning the money to the source. If it's tainted, then give the money to the State or a charity Why return it to the person trying to buy influence? Talk about a no-risk situation for the donor. Mr. Kirk (running in Illinois) was going to return a $5,000 campaign contribution to Goldman Sachs. Does Goldman Sachs need the money? No. Does Illinois? Yes. We are so stupid when we believe returning the money to the donor is the best use.

amplover said on: October 16, 2010, 7:14 am
He only returned it because he got caught!~

MKE said on: October 16, 2010, 6:51 am
I wanted to say something rude??? But, oh well I'll do it.
I had the displeasure of having what some would call a conversation with DOOOOOOLEY. He would better serve humanity as a backup singer for some rap group. Talking to him was like being on the street corner in the middle of the ghetto, did you ever see the movie Barber shop? He made Cedric the Entertainer look good!!!!

Key West35 said on: October 16, 2010, 5:37 am
Makes me wonder all the more about the trash deal he forced upon us. My vote will be Republican this time. At least we will have someone that speaks better english if Corrigan is elected.


  1. Anonymous11:10 AM

    Is anybody REALLY surprised that a bastion of ethics like Uncle Charlie took monry from a company that gets county contracts?

  2. Anonymous5:05 PM

    Come on folks, say what's really on your minds. Don't hold back.

  3. Anonymous10:14 PM

    Just keep digging, deeper and deeper. You will find that John Tmporiti, Dooleys Campaign man, was also a hired lobbyist for Allied Waste during the time leading up to the county making the decision to contract out the services.

  4. Anonymous2:15 PM

    Why doesn't somebody say what they really think of Charlie?

  5. Anonymous7:51 AM

    Would the donation have even been made if not for trash districts? Corrigan should not lower himself to Dooley’s level. All he has to say in his campaign adds is “trash districts” and “city/county merger”. Let Dooley self-destruct.